On 2021-08-31 9:11 a.m., Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Aug 26, 2021 at 11:04:14AM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Thu, Aug 19, 2021 at 11:25:09AM -0400, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
On 2021-08-19 5:30 a.m., Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:51:00AM -0400, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
On 2021-08-18 10:42 a.m., Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:36:32AM -0400, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
On 2021-08-18 10:32 a.m., Daniel Vetter wrote:
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 10:26:25AM -0400, Andrey Grodzovsky wrote:
On 2021-08-18 10:02 a.m., Alex Deucher wrote:
+ dri-devel
Since scheduler is a shared component, please add dri-devel on all
scheduler patches.
On Wed, Aug 18, 2021 at 7:21 AM Jingwen Chen <jingwen.ch...@amd.com> wrote:
[Why]
for bailing job, this commit will delete it from pending list thus the
bailing job will never have a chance to be resubmitted even in advance
tdr mode.
[How]
after embeded hw_fence into amdgpu_job is done, the race condition that
this commit tries to work around is completely solved.So revert this
commit.
This reverts commit 135517d3565b48f4def3b1b82008bc17eb5d1c90.
v2:
add dma_fence_get/put() around timedout_job to avoid concurrent delete
during processing timedout_job
Signed-off-by: Jingwen Chen <jingwen.ch...@amd.com>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c | 23 +++++------------------
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
index a2a953693b45..f9b9b3aefc4a 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/scheduler/sched_main.c
@@ -314,6 +314,7 @@ static void drm_sched_job_timedout(struct work_struct *work)
{
struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched;
struct drm_sched_job *job;
+ struct dma_fence *fence;
enum drm_gpu_sched_stat status = DRM_GPU_SCHED_STAT_NOMINAL;
sched = container_of(work, struct drm_gpu_scheduler,
work_tdr.work);
@@ -325,11 +326,10 @@ static void drm_sched_job_timedout(struct work_struct
*work)
if (job) {
/*
- * Remove the bad job so it cannot be freed by concurrent
- * drm_sched_cleanup_jobs. It will be reinserted back after
sched->thread
- * is parked at which point it's safe.
+ * Get job->s_fence->parent here to avoid concurrent delete
during
+ * processing timedout_job
*/
- list_del_init(&job->list);
+ fence = dma_fence_get(job->s_fence->parent);
While this is true for amdgpu, it has no meaning for other drivers for whom
we haven't
done the refactoring of embedding HW fence (parent) into the job structure.
In fact thinking
about it, unless you do the HW fence embedding for all the drivers using the
scheduler you cannot
revert this patch or you will just break them.
btw, why did you do that embedding? I do still have my patches with
dma_fence annotations floating around, but my idea at least was to fix
that issue with a mempool, not with embeddeding. What was the motivation
for embedding the wh fence?
-Daniel
The motivation was 2 fold, avoid memory allocation during jobs submissions
(HW fence allocation) because as Christian explained this leads to deadlock
with
mm code during evictions due to memory pressure (Christian can clarify if I
messed
Yeah that's the exact same thing I've chased with my dma_fence
annotations, but thus far zero to none interested in getting it sorted. I
think it'd be good to have some cross-driver agreement on how this should
be solved before someone just charges ahead ...
this explanation). Second is to exactly revert this patch because while it
solved the issue
described in the patch it created another with drivers who baildc out early
during TDR handling
for various reason and the job would just leak because it was already
removed form pending list.
Can't we reinsert it before we restart the scheduler thread? It might need
a separate list for that due to the lockless queue tricks. Or am I
thinking about the wrong kind of "we lost the job"?
-Danile
If you look at the original patch it would reinsert it even earlier - right
after stopping the SW scheduler thread, and even then it was to late for
some drivers as they would decide to return back from their TDR handler even
before that. It is solvable but in an ugly way as far as I see, you need to
require each driver in his code to put the job back in the list if they do
it before reaching the place where scheduler framework does it. Kind of
spaghetti code seems to me.
Hm yeah I didn't realize this all happens before we stop the scheduler
thread.
Why can't we stop the scheduler thread first, so that there's guaranteed
no race? I've recently had a lot of discussions with panfrost folks about
their reset that spawns across engines, and without stopping the scheduler
thread first before you touch anything it's just plain impossible.
Talked with Christian on that, for each TDR we actually stop all the
schedulers for all the rings and not only the hanged ring since
ASIC reset will impact all the rings anyway. So we cannot allow
other timeout handlers for other rings run in parallel to ours
as they will stop/restart the threads we just stopped and rely
on them being stopped. So it's all done with device wide lock
inside the amdgpu tTDR handler. Only inside the locked
section then we may stop/restart the scheduler threads.
Christian also mentioned that you proposed at some point
to serialize all TDR handling into single threading for all rings - this
seems
like something that could be used - we then don't need any
locking against TDR handlers from other rings and then we may
stop the scheduler thread as first step
I'm also still not understanding what exactly you guys have done,
can someone please dig out the the amdgpu patches that motivate all this
maybe that's clearer? A full explanation would still be good since I've
only started in scheduler stuff.
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgitlab.freedesktop.org%2Fagd5f%2Flinux%2F-%2Fcommit%2Fde7515d43659f852590645a688f8d493e4a18141&data=04%7C01%7Candrey.grodzovsky%40amd.com%7C94e4badd78c04cb74ad208d96c80debd%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637660123033001546%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=itjKBNUdOAyze1%2FOWJtBD7ed%2B8PBbB28QbJEddkc98w%3D&reserved=0
Uh, it would have been really good if this was discussed a bit wider
beforehand. Now we have rather diverging approaches to this. Also would be
really good to resurrect the dma_fence annotations too.
Can you guys pls spend a bit of time on this? Shouldn't be to hard to type
up rfc conversion patches for the other drivers.
Ping for this. Currently the hw fence is returned from the ->run_job
callback, and that's not great design.
What's the problem you see there ?
If we embed it, then I think it should start existing latest from
drm_sched_job_arm. Maybe not yet initialized, but at least allocated. So
the right thing to do here is to have the hw fence as a pointer in
struct drm_sched_job. And check in drm_sched_job_arm() that it's at least
allocated.
Why we need to allocate the HW fence if it's embedded within a job struct ?
Otherwise we're just diverging across drivers and tempting them to do the
wrong thing with the current ->run_job callback interface.
Maybe we should switch from embedding in driver level job struct as it's now
to drm_sched_job and just leave the fence initialization to driver
specific code ?
Andrey
Can you guys look into this?
-Daniel
Another thing I recently pondered for tdr races looking at i915 code is
whether the tdr should first block the completion fence for that job. My
motivation is to have a race-free error capture (if the completion races
then we might start evicting memory and everything goes boom), but maybe
that helps here too. Some kind of atomic "block this fence from
completing thing.
Or I'm I completely guessing in the wrong direction?
I think we already do it here -
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Felixir.bootlin.com%2Flinux%2Fv5.14-rc1%2Fsource%2Fdrivers%2Fgpu%2Fdrm%2Fscheduler%2Fsched_main.c%23L410&data=04%7C01%7Candrey.grodzovsky%40amd.com%7C94e4badd78c04cb74ad208d96c80debd%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637660123033001546%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=Maya0Mk1sAliheOv7fCM8bTC7qTOp74Agt1u67kYCJw%3D&reserved=0
Ah yes this works becase drm/sched has separate hw fence from the logical
job fence.
-Daniel
Andrey
-Daniel
Andrey
Andrey
Andrey
spin_unlock(&sched->job_list_lock);
status = job->sched->ops->timedout_job(job);
@@ -342,6 +342,7 @@ static void drm_sched_job_timedout(struct work_struct *work)
job->sched->ops->free_job(job);
sched->free_guilty = false;
}
+ dma_fence_put(fence);
} else {
spin_unlock(&sched->job_list_lock);
}
@@ -392,20 +393,6 @@ void drm_sched_stop(struct drm_gpu_scheduler *sched,
struct drm_sched_job *bad)
kthread_park(sched->thread);
- /*
- * Reinsert back the bad job here - now it's safe as
- * drm_sched_get_cleanup_job cannot race against us and release the
- * bad job at this point - we parked (waited for) any in progress
- * (earlier) cleanups and drm_sched_get_cleanup_job will not be called
- * now until the scheduler thread is unparked.
- */
- if (bad && bad->sched == sched)
- /*
- * Add at the head of the queue to reflect it was the earliest
- * job extracted.
- */
- list_add(&bad->list, &sched->pending_list);
-
/*
* Iterate the job list from later to earlier one and either
deactive
* their HW callbacks or remove them from pending list if they
already
--
2.25.1
--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fblog.ffwll.ch%2F&data=04%7C01%7Candrey.grodzovsky%40amd.com%7C94e4badd78c04cb74ad208d96c80debd%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637660123033001546%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=r7EGQcWGcRinVxmD%2F%2FIFA8WgRpYNnt7feQseD92U6kc%3D&reserved=0
